Monday, July 4, 2016

The battle Between Mesoamerica and the Great Lakes - Part I

A reader sent me this very
extensive article written on the “Book of Mormon Wars” website.First of all, let me say not
only have I seen this sight before and always cringed when reading the title,
thinking that people consider a war going on between LDS members over the geography of
the Book of Mormon Land of Promise. How sad that this is. It is one thing to
have an opinion and be willing to express it, but it is quite another to be
antagonistic and overly aggressive about it. Knowing where the events of the
scriptural record took place can be helpful, just as knowing where the events
of the Bible took place are helpful in better understanding those events. Yet,
when the Bible first appeared, those locations were very much in
question—today, they are far more understood, but still leave some doubts about
certain facts.

The location of the Nephite
Nation should never evoke out and out arguing and contention for that is neither
the intent of the scriptural record nor the Lord’s way of achieving results.
Neither should it be for one to shut their mind off to learning more about the
meaning of the scriptural record but rather be involved in constant study,
pondering, and prayerful evaluation.As has always been the stance of
this blog and those involved in its writing, publishing and research, what the
scriptures say is what matters. While some think the scriptural record is
ambiguous, such as the author of that website article when he writes regarding
the scriptural record: “particularly where they are
vague (such as what the text means by "northward" or "narrow
neck of land").”Neither
these two areas, nor any others throughout the scriptural record, are vague nor
do they have divergent or opposing meanings. While it is true that almost all
scripture has meanings far deeper than most people see or understand when
reading the Book of Mormon, those deeper meanings are not separate or in
conflict—they are just deeper meanings. As an
example, when Helaman spoke to his sons he told them,
“Remember that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is Christ, the Son of
God, that ye must build your foundation” (Helaman 5:12), however, while that is
understood by almost all, there is a deeper meaning involved since in the time
of the scriptural occurrence, people did not build foundations as we do today,
i.e., leveling ground, building a frame, pouring it with cement, then putting
down a bottom plate, vertical studs, top plate, etc.

Buildings anciently had to be built on (red
arrow) bedrock for their stability. When they people on sand dirt, subsoil, or
topsoil, which is easier and simpler, cheaper and quicker, the foundation fails
in almost any type of weather especially one where rains can wash away the soil

Anciently, to make
sure of stability of the type Helaman was describing, builders dug down to the bedrock (that area of the lithified rock that
lies under the loose softer material or regolith)--the solid base of the earth,
by removing the dirt and reaching the solid rock subsurface. They then secured their
foundation upon that solid rock and built from there, which is partially
described in Luke 6:48).

Yellow Arrow: Some bedrock is at the
surface; but (white arrow) most is not and requires deep excavation to reach

Since accessing the
bedrock, in most cases, requires significant excavation of soils (sand, clay,
etc.) overlying the bedrock, but because building the foundation upon bedrock
is necessary given the extremely large loads associated with important
construction, the understanding is of great effort—thus in building one’s life
upon a rock takes hard work, understanding, and a willingness not to settle for
less. It is a deeper meaning, especially to those who have dug down to solid
bedrock and not just lay a cement pad over the ground.The point is, whether
you take the surface meaning of having a solid foundation or the deeper meaning
of reaching bedrock, the concept of the scripture is the same, one simply gives
you greater insight into the meaning or process needed than the other. Thus,
the symbology of Helaman 5:12 paints a clear picture of what is needed to be
secure and stable, no matter what age or what culture to which people belong.In this article being
discussed here, the author takes to task John E. Clark, archaeologist at BYU
and former anthropology dean John L. Sorenson for their statements about how
the Book of Mormon over the last 50 years is converging (coming together) with
the Mesoamerican theory regarding the location of the Land of Promise.While we can applaud
the author’s resistance to such an idea, we have to point out that his stance
that the Great Lakes is the location of the Land of Promise is equally
inaccurate and untenable. After reading this extensive article, the problem, as
it always is regarding the different theories promoted by well-meaning but
hard-headed views is that they try to bend the scriptural record to mean what
they want it to mean. This is true of Mesoamericanists, Great Lakes, and the
author of the website article, and the many other theorists who insist on this
point or that point, but ignore the points of which they disagree. As an example, the
author states: “Other text-based claims, such as
finding mountains throughout the text where they don't appear,” is interesting,
since there are mountains in Mesoamerica, but not in the Great Lakes area.

The
author harps on the fact that Mesoamericanists use the term volcanoes regarding
their mountains, and volcanoes are not mentioned in the scriptural record. The
fact that the word “volcano” from the “Vulcan,” god of fire in Roman mythology,
would not have been known to Mormon or any other writer of the scriptural
record. At the same time, the author forgets that in Nephi, Helaman and 3
Nephi, we have three distinct descriptions of mountains “crumbling” and falling
to form valleys and others rising, as Samuel the Lamanite said, “whose height is great” (Helaman 14:23).
Samuel goes on to say “the
angel said unto me that many shall see greater things than these, to the intent
that they might believe that these signs and these wonders should come to pass
upon all the face of this land, to the intent that there should be no cause for
unbelief among the children of men” (Helaman 14:28).

That is, these signs
and wonders, mountains tumbling into level valleys, level valleys rising into
mountains, whose height is great, would be for the people to see with the
intent that there should be no cause for unbelief among the children of men.
Now, throughout the Land of Promise, i.e., from the Land of Nephi to the Land
of Desolation and Land of Many Waters, these mountains would fall and rise so
that all within the Land of Promise could see them and believe in the signs so
there would be no unbelief among them. Common sense tells us that this would
not be possible unless the signs were so wide-spread as to allow basically
everyone throughout the Land of Promise to both see them and understand their
nature, so they would know it was God who did the tumbling and rising of
mountains, among other things.The problem lies in
the author only seeing that the word “volcano” does not appear in the
scripture, missing all the factors involved to show him that the Great Lakes
region, which has no mountains of any height and hardly a single hill,
discounts his vociferous claim that he knows where the Land of Promise is
located.